Men at Arms

[Karl Marx]

are dismounted man at arms and dismounted broken lances inferior to dismounted feudal knights ?

What about their mounted counterparts?

[WAN]

Love you karl marx <3

[Langkard]

I'm more of a Mikhail Bakunin fan.

For the OP:

Dismounted Men-at-Arms and Broken Lances have nearly identical stats. The Men-at-Arms have slightly better defense but slightly lower armor.

The dismounted Feudal Knights have slightly better attack than either and about half of the armor but a better defense skill and better shields. Their upkeep cost is also higher.

Dismounted Men-at-Arms give you a better deal, as far as cost/benefit.

[ashunsley]

Short answer is that men at arms (mounted and dismounted) and broken lances (mounted and dismounted) are generally inferior to more generic knights and I almost never bother taking them in the campaign game.
(you might take them in one off battles because of the cost penalty of taking too many copies of the same unit)

Individual unit breakdown:

Broken Lances:
It makes more sense to compare (mounted) broken lances to mailed knights than to feudal knights. (They have the same mounts, which move faster than those of feudal knights but may do less damage in a charge)

I actually prefer mailed knights to feudal knights because they're faster and easier to replenish, and their stats are the same except for a slightly lower defense.
(Mounted) Broken Lances are pretty much the same as mailed knights except they don't have shields and they have lower endurance. They also have a ridiculously high maintenance cost. The only advantage they have is that you can raise them in cities (although only very advanced ones).
The only circumstances I've ever raised them is when there's an immediate threat and I need heavy cavalry fast. When the emergency is over I disband them.

Dismounted broken lances are pretty much the same as dismounted feudal knights, but they're slightly cheaper and they have slightly lower stats except morale. (Maintenance cost is the same). Dismounted broken lances have significantly lower morale than dismounted feudal knights. But again, you can build them in cities.

Dismounted men at arms are the most useless of all. They are the same as dismounted broken lances but you can only build them in castles- where you can already build dismounted feudal knights, which are just better.

[ashunsley]

Originally posted by Langkard:

I'm more of a Mikhail Bakunin fan.

The dismounted Feudal Knights have slightly better attack than either and about half of the armor but a better defense skill and better shields. Their upkeep cost is also higher.

Dismounted Men-at-Arms give you a better deal, as far as cost/benefit.

I'm looking at the recruiting screen- in vanilla the upkeep cost is the same (225) and I believe it is the same for dismounted broken lances as well.

In any case there is a substantial difference in morale.

[Langkard]

Originally posted by ashunsley:

Originally posted by Langkard:

I'm more of a Mikhail Bakunin fan.

The dismounted Feudal Knights have slightly better attack than either and about half of the armor but a better defense skill and better shields. Their upkeep cost is also higher.

Dismounted Men-at-Arms give you a better deal, as far as cost/benefit.

I'm looking at the recruiting screen- in vanilla the upkeep cost is the same (225) and I believe it is the same for dismounted broken lances as well.

In any case there is a substantial difference in morale.

I just realized I was looking at the Stainless Steel stats, not vanilla.

[Karl Marx]

I suppose I'll use F knights now . thank you